Unemployment Down to 7.8% jobs are now available to nearly everyone! (Brown, compare)

[jt800]

Originally Posted by OICU812

Y
I do like how losing an additional 100,000 jobs was not enough to pull down the UE rate, but 114,000 can bump it by three points.

THAT is the crux of this entire debate!!!!

4,000 jobs difference and the rate moves 3% ???

As I said this does not pass the smell test.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by walidm

I don't have an agenda. I asked you for statistical data.

You accused the Administration of lying, unfortunately your presentation of data has shown flaws in either:

Your understanding of the data and statistics,

or, your ability to understand complex statistical data and analyze it properly.

As explained by prior posters, the main reason unemployment declined is that the numerator (the number of employed Americans) increased faster than the denominator (the civilian labor force) in the unemployment equation. The data supports and shows the participation rate in the civilian labor force has, and continues to decline through the last 2 Administrations.

The population is growing yet less people need to work.
Less people need to work yet food stamp rolls are at record highs as well as other government welfare programs.

There's something not right when you put all these numbers/percents next to each other.

[walidm]

Originally Posted by OICU812

I do like how losing an additional 100,000 jobs was not enough to pull down the UE rate, but 114,000 can bump it by three points.

Perhaps you're having trouble with the analytic report.

In August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said that it had overestimated job growth in June and July, revising down the number of jobs added in those months by more than 40,000. Thus, the bureau estimates the economy added fewer than 100,000 jobs a month through the summer months – not enough to pull down the unemployment rate, given normal expansion in the labor force.

The caveat is clearly stated.

[Kracer]

Cause and effect?
what policies caused this liberal celebration over an anomoly.

Relate the blip in unemployment to a specific practice or policy.

[walidm]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

The population is growing yet less people need to work.
Less people need to work yet food stamp rolls are at record highs as well as other government welfare programs.

There's something not right when you put all these numbers/percents next to each other.

Any who haven't been paying attention need only blame themselves.

The data has shown (for years) that equilibrium and then acceleration would be reached in the curve and tables showing the retirement of the workforce, offshoring of labor, and growth sectors of the labor market in correlation to birth rates per generation. Many consider this the tip of the iceberg.

There's a bunch of folks who believe we will become more of an intellectual and service oriented labor force vs. manufacturing.

~shrug

We've had a bunch of different eras in the Nation's development, we're just moving faster now, we communicate on a faster, higher level, and we're more prone to shared hysteria.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

uhm the number of people PARTICIPATING in working is going DOWN yet the population is going UP


Americans Employed, January 2009:........................ 142,187,000
Americans Employed, today:.................................. 142,101,000

UE rate today............... 7.8
UE rate january 2009..... 7.8

USA POPULATION january 2009......305,529,237
usa population TODAY .................314,519,754



hmmm population has increased by............ 9 million
number of EMPLOYEED has DECREASED by.. 87k
yet the UE rate is the same

hmmmmmm


the numbers dont lie

Obama and the MSM are lying.

350,000 people are no longer seeking work. They are no longer being counted. What the jobs report actually says is there was a marginal job creation figure of just 114,000 while 350,000 have given up looking for work. That means 300% more Americans have given up than found employment during the month of September alone under the Obama Admin.

The labor participation rate is still trending DOWN:



Obama sucks.

[gwynedd1]

Another question I have is has demand really shifted?


This implies the change in quantity demanded as labor is selling at a discount.

Wages aren’t stagnating, they’re plummeting



That means there is not more demand for work and the unemployment problem is being solved by labor caving in for cheaper work.

That would tend to be consistent with the labor participation rate dropping since the those on the margins will not see the value in working.

So buying power is not going up.

Its also consistent with :

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/bu...inds.html?_r=0

Some of you people celebrating really don't have much taste.


At some point this will settle into an equilibrium, but much more like a banana republic. Slaves never have unemployment so its a pretty good idea to see employment in context.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by walidm

Any who haven't been paying attention need only blame themselves.

The data has shown (for years) that equilibrium and then acceleration would be reached in the curve and tables showing the retirement of the workforce, offshoring of labor, and growth sectors of the labor market in correlation to birth rates per generation. Many consider this the tip of the iceberg.

There's a bunch of folks who believe we will become more of an intellectual and service oriented labor force vs. manufacturing.

~shrug

We've had a bunch of different eras in the Nation's development, we're just moving faster now, we communicate on a faster, higher level, and we're more prone to shared hysteria.

The bulk of the jobs created that the BLS just reported on were ambulance drivers (30K).
As far a intellectual labor, not when the US is falling in education, especially in math/science.
Companies are fighting for increased H1-B visas and green cards to bring in those types of workers.

[OICU812]

Originally Posted by walidm

Perhaps you're having trouble with the analytic report.

In August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said that it had overestimated job growth in June and July, revising down the number of jobs added in those months by more than 40,000. Thus, the bureau estimates the economy added fewer than 100,000 jobs a month through the summer months – not enough to pull down the unemployment rate, given normal expansion in the labor force.

The caveat is clearly stated.

The labor force expands every month, as new people are entering the labor force, but we aren't creating enough jobs for those people. So yes, we added 100,000 jobs a month, but it is not enough to lower unemployment.

[walidm]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

The bulk of the jobs created that the BLS just reported on were ambulance drivers (30K).
As far a intellectual labor, not when the US is falling in education, especially in math/science.
Companies are fighting for increased H1-B visas and green cards to bring in those types of workers.

Good. We'll need a lot of ambulance drivers since we can't stop the population from aging in very large groups.

The US education system will be fine. Stop measuring us compared to everyone else. Our system has worked and created a Nation envied by the World.

I'll let you figure out why everyone wants to come here...